Author Topic: Colorado Movie Shooting  (Read 10121 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline LoriPinkAngel

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1265
  • Darwins +132/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • I'm Your Nurse, Not Your Waitress...
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #116 on: July 26, 2012, 09:39:28 AM »
@ Hatter - that is a good point.  Would you be opposed to weapons other than for hunting and protection and ammo over a certain amount being stored at the gun club or armory?
It doesn't make sense to let go of something you've had for so long.  But it also doesn't make sense to hold on when there's actually nothing there.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3956
  • Darwins +265/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #117 on: July 26, 2012, 10:53:18 AM »
@ Hatter - that is a good point.  Would you be opposed to weapons other than for hunting and protection and ammo over a certain amount being stored at the gun club or armory?


I've got mixed opions on the subject, I'll admit I am a bit paranoid BECAUSE I am an atheist who's views are mainly leftist. And I see the camp that would like to see my kind eliminated arming themselves. I think of a gun as ultimate insurance to fight back if a fascist does take power. Plus there's the counterpoint of crime and civil unrest and it is also an insurance against that.

When It came to this tradgedy, I don't think that any gun laws would really have made a difference because I've made pipe bombs, molatov cocktail and improvised flamethrowers in my youth. That man was nuts and was looking to kill people; he could have done it by blocking the exits and a gasoline bomb, he could have rented a SUV and gone through a school playground...any number of things.

And if you want to think about some restriction about being mentally competent in order to buy, you don't need to look further than the US military than to see how this could play out as those that set the standard could easily count being an atheist as insane.

And bans tend to just create a black market, just look at drugs. Plenty of bans on them and I could get a huge amount drugs within two hours in my city if I had the cash.

The solution I would like to see is something like a trigger lock, but a cellphone, camera, GPS attachment to handguns.  A range could be issued a jammer, but if a handgun with said attachment is fired the police are immediately notified of your location, with a camera showing what you are shooting at, if it is someone pointing a gun at you, coming at you with a knife...your story of self defence should be self-evident.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #118 on: July 26, 2012, 01:11:28 PM »
<snip>Ergo only let the public have muskets and single shot pistols since it doesn't actually state that they can have the very latest the the gun industry has to offer.

Well, since the constitution never mentions abortion we should also revoke that right yes? I'm sure the framers of the constitution never envisioned millions of fetus being snuffed out every year. So, lets just revoke that "right" as well eh?

The constitution doesn't mention electricity either so maybe you should only use steam driven computers. It does on the other hand mention the right to bear arms. Guns are getting more powerful all the time. What if they came up with a viable laser rifle?

Quote
These systems would be portable and lightweight; the battery operated solid state laser system would be comparable in size to the Armbrust and Dragon anti-tank systems, …. The man-portable… weapons system is expected to be lethal in the range of 1-5 miles, due to the fact that no sharp focusing of the laser beam is required. Therefore, it is capable of engaging both short and long ranged targets of any kind, greatly increasing the engagement area of current assault rifles.


http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/04/plasma_pulse_la/.

Should such a weapon be on sale to the general public? Just where do you draw the line?
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12674
  • Darwins +707/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #119 on: July 26, 2012, 01:22:46 PM »
What if they came up with a viable laser rifle?

I would buy two.

Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #120 on: July 26, 2012, 01:28:23 PM »

When It came to this tradgedy, I don't think that any gun laws would really have made a difference because I've made pipe bombs, molatov cocktail and improvised flamethrowers in my youth. That man was nuts and was looking to kill people; he could have done it by blocking the exits and a gasoline bomb, he could have rented a SUV and gone through a school playground...any number of things.


Maybe he could have built a nuke and wiped out an entire city but he decided to go down the gun road instead. You keep coming up with these totally unviable alternate methods of killing people yet they keep using guns. I wonder why?

BTW I particularly like blocking all the exits. I'm sure nobody would have noticed him doing that.
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline LoriPinkAngel

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1265
  • Darwins +132/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • I'm Your Nurse, Not Your Waitress...
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #121 on: July 26, 2012, 01:52:16 PM »

What if they came up with a viable laser rifle?

Oh boy, or "fazers" like on Star Trek!!
It doesn't make sense to let go of something you've had for so long.  But it also doesn't make sense to hold on when there's actually nothing there.

Offline none

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2808
  • Darwins +11/-4
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #122 on: July 26, 2012, 02:23:45 PM »
imagine the headline...
1/2 million killed by fazer armed militia....

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12674
  • Darwins +707/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #123 on: July 26, 2012, 02:49:11 PM »
a good example of why we need better gun control.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012/07/24/Texan-accidentally-fires-shot-at-Walmart/UPI-45371343147222/?spt=hs&or=tn

It's not that I want to take away everyone's guns.  I just want to take them away from idiots.  I cannot help it if a lot of idiots are gun owners.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3956
  • Darwins +265/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #124 on: July 26, 2012, 03:15:50 PM »

When It came to this tradgedy, I don't think that any gun laws would really have made a difference because I've made pipe bombs, molatov cocktail and improvised flamethrowers in my youth. That man was nuts and was looking to kill people; he could have done it by blocking the exits and a gasoline bomb, he could have rented a SUV and gone through a school playground...any number of things.


Maybe he could have built a nuke and wiped out an entire city but he decided to go down the gun road instead. You keep coming up with these totally unviable alternate methods of killing people yet they keep using guns. I wonder why?

BTW I particularly like blocking all the exits. I'm sure nobody would have noticed him doing that.

"I" keep coming up with?????? This is my first post on that vein. Gasoline bomb equaling Nuke in difficulty? Because laundry soap, gasoline and a fireworks punk reuires the level of engineering that creating a sufficent implosion of fissional material into critical mass requires; your fucking ridiculous Frank.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #125 on: July 26, 2012, 06:10:10 PM »
<snip>Ergo only let the public have muskets and single shot pistols since it doesn't actually state that they can have the very latest the the gun industry has to offer.

Well, since the constitution never mentions abortion we should also revoke that right yes? I'm sure the framers of the constitution never envisioned millions of fetus being snuffed out every year. So, lets just revoke that "right" as well eh?

The constitution doesn't mention electricity either so maybe you should only use steam driven computers. It does on the other hand mention the right to bear arms. Guns are getting more powerful all the time. What if they came up with a viable laser rifle?

At the time  of the writing of the constitution, muskets and single shot pistols WERE military hardware. If it covered an individual's right to bear military hardware then, then by your logic it should cover the right for individuals to bear military hardware now.

I personally draw the line at fully automatic and/or large caliber weapons, explosive devices, ground to air artillery, combat ready tanks or anything that requires more than one person to operate....and nuclear devices since that's on the table now.

You know, pretty much everything that's off limits to the general public at the present moment.

The thing I find interesting is how you changed your argument slightly when I mentioned things not covered explicitly in the constitution which are currently upheld by the supreme court as constitutional. Your original argument, that I commented on, laid out that we should only be allowed to keep muskets and single shot pistols because that was what was available when the constitution was written.

Using that logic throws a wrench in the cogs, so to speak, because if we stuck strictly with what was specifically outlined in the first draft of the constitution then there would be no possible chance to progress past the 1700's. Abortion would still be illegal, slaves would still be bought and sold, White land owners would be the only people allowed to vote. 

So, when you try to argue that we should only be allowed to possess muskets and single shot pistols because the right to bear arms WAS provided for in the constitution BUT those were the only firearms available at the time, you make a horribly flawed argument....please stop doing that.






I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #126 on: July 26, 2012, 06:31:12 PM »

At the time  of the writing of the constitution, muskets and single shot pistols WERE military hardware. If it covered an individual's right to bear military hardware then, then by your logic it should cover the right for individuals to bear military hardware now.


America had no military back then. The only reason it exists at all was to give America a militia. Well you have a standing army now but you're still clinging on to those guns.
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #127 on: July 26, 2012, 06:36:04 PM »
America had no military back then. The only reason it exists at all was to give America a militia. Well you have a standing army now but you're still clinging on to those guns.

Because it's provided for, albeit with vague language, within the constitution. That's a good start and I'm curious about what you have to say since you seem to be able to intuit what the writers of the constitution must have "really" meant...now how bout the rest of my response?
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline MadBunny

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3625
  • Darwins +124/-0
  • Fallen Illuminatus
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #128 on: July 26, 2012, 07:33:23 PM »
Like I said before, maybe we should be focusing our blame on the crazy person rather than that he was able to get weapons.
Yes, he used guns.  I'm not overwhelmed with angst about that. Mind you, I'm not under any circumstances trying to say that it wasn't a terrible thing.

I'm also not all that overwhelmed about the number of people who died or were injured.  Sure, I'd feel terrible if I knew any of them personally, but I don't.  I can only feel bad for their situation rather than for them as people.

http://www.areavibes.com/aurora-co/crime/

You know what though?  I feel really bad for the 183 people who were raped that didn't get a huge outpouring of community support and a national conversation about how terrible a crime it is.

I'm a bit more concerned about being killed by prostate cancer than I am about being gunned down by a crazy person with a gun.  28,000 people were killed just last year by that.
http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@nho/documents/document/prostatecancerpdf.pdf

Quote
There were 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000.[4] The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides,[5] with 17,352 (55.6%) of the total 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 due to suicide, while 12,632 (40.5%) were homicide deaths

12,634 is a lot of people, but not compared to the number of people who have guns vs those who get ass cancer.
Statistically, you're less likely to get killed by a crazy guy with a gun.

So yes, gun violence is bad; but I think that we should be more focused on the crazy people and their easy access to said guns than the guns.
Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a night.  Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #129 on: July 26, 2012, 09:05:45 PM »
Do they stand to benefit financially from the sale of guns?

I cannot be sure, but I don't think so.  They are ideologues with power.  As such, they exist to exercise that power. 

From where do they derive their power?
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6947
  • Darwins +940/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #130 on: July 26, 2012, 10:59:00 PM »
<snip>Ergo only let the public have muskets and single shot pistols since it doesn't actually state that they can have the very latest the the gun industry has to offer.

Well, since the constitution never mentions abortion we should also revoke that right yes? I'm sure the framers of the constitution never envisioned millions of fetus being snuffed out every year. So, lets just revoke that "right" as well eh?

I also said that about the muskets, being snarky-- and I think you are missing the point. Society has changed and we have altered and amended the constitution to reflect those changes. We no longer have slavery. Women can vote. And hardly anyone has to hunt their food or defend their little home on the prairie against the "savages". We have a police force, telephones, and machine guns instead of single shot muskets.

So, why the resistance to altering the constitution to say that private citizens can't have certain weapons, and can't have more than a certain amount of ammo? And that you can't keep a bunch of loaded guns in your house? And that you should be properly trained and licensed to legally own one at all? What could possibly be wrong with that in a sane world?

You don't need high powered weaponry to hunt, because the deer don't shoot back. If you want to shoot at targets, go to a range, get the gun there, shoot at the target and go home.  That's what they do in Canada and Japan. And they aren't burying children every few weeks from gun violence.

If you think that X amount of handguns and XXX amount of ammo will defend you against the US government, you are wrong. You also need a few nuclear warheads, some cruise missiles, some attack helicopters, some nuclear subs, some fighter planes, some drones, some aircraft carriers and the trained people to operate all of that. Basically, you'd have to be Israel. Or China.

So, people who want hundreds of guns are just paranoid freaks, because there is no way that they can fight the US government militarily. Or they are dangerous terrorists who should be under constant surveillance. And people will keep getting shot until we come to our senses and wake up to the fact that it ain't 1773. Tell that to the gun lobby.

BTW on the abortion topic: the founders were well aware of abortion and decided, wisely, to leave such issues up to the women themselves. It was not until the 19th century that religious people started getting all up in women's vaginas. And never looked back.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline LoriPinkAngel

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1265
  • Darwins +132/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • I'm Your Nurse, Not Your Waitress...
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #131 on: July 26, 2012, 11:18:48 PM »
Quote
So, people who want hundreds of guns are just paranoid freaks

...bring lawyers, guns and money, the sh*t has hit the fan (couldn't resist)
It doesn't make sense to let go of something you've had for so long.  But it also doesn't make sense to hold on when there's actually nothing there.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6947
  • Darwins +940/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #132 on: July 26, 2012, 11:25:26 PM »
Quote
So, people who want hundreds of guns are just paranoid freaks

...bring lawyers, guns and money, the sh*t has hit the fan (couldn't resist)

Damn, I miss Warren Zevon. Another cool Chicagoan. A-woooooo!
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12674
  • Darwins +707/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #133 on: July 27, 2012, 06:51:53 AM »
From where do they derive their power?

money

Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline HAL

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5019
  • Darwins +98/-17
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #134 on: July 27, 2012, 07:12:34 AM »
From where do they derive their power?

money

Blackwell -

They have money which will be donated to the re-election campaign of the politician they are lobbying. That's why a "regular" citizen can't lobby their representative to any effect. They could try, but without a backing of money that could be used for or against the politician, your say doesn't mean diddly squat. You are nobody - nothing to them. I've written my representative and after a week I got back a form letter which was basically trash. The whole system is rigged. We need representatives who are elected for one term to go do a job and then go home.

Offline pianodwarf

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Darwins +208/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappé
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #135 on: July 27, 2012, 07:36:17 AM »
Damn, I miss Warren Zevon. Another cool Chicagoan. A-woooooo!

I went to college with his daughter.  She was hot.

It was funny... until she started there, I had never heard of him before, so when he came up for parents' weekend, most of the other kids on campus were going, "Hey, look!  There's Warren Zevon!" and even though I was standing right next to him in the dining hall dinner line, I didn't think anything of it.  The only thing I found out, much later, was that he was the one who had written a song performed by the band that an old roommate of mine was in.  ("Werewolves in London".)
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12674
  • Darwins +707/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #136 on: July 27, 2012, 11:34:46 AM »
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Backspace

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1297
  • Darwins +56/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • IXNAY
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #137 on: July 27, 2012, 12:52:36 PM »
America had no military back then...

Quote
Following the American Revolution, the United States faced potential military conflict on the high seas as well as on the western frontier. The United States was a minor military power during this time, having a modest army and navy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_the_United_States
There is no opinion so absurd that a preacher could not express it.
-- Bernie Katz

Offline MadBunny

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3625
  • Darwins +124/-0
  • Fallen Illuminatus
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #138 on: July 27, 2012, 03:11:30 PM »
Why do I get the feeling that comic is aimed at me?
Nice post Screwtape, it perfectly encapsulates the problem.
Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a night.  Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12674
  • Darwins +707/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #139 on: July 27, 2012, 03:23:15 PM »
Why do I get the feeling that comic is aimed at me?

It wasn't.  I happened to be catching up on Tom Tomorrow and thought it was relevant to our discussion.

Nice post Screwtape, it perfectly encapsulates the problem.

That vaguely sounds sarcastic, but I am not sure. If so, in what way do you disagree?
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3956
  • Darwins +265/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #140 on: July 27, 2012, 07:28:27 PM »
Why do I get the feeling that comic is aimed at me?

It wasn't.  I happened to be catching up on Tom Tomorrow and thought it was relevant to our discussion.

Nice post Screwtape, it perfectly encapsulates the problem.

That vaguely sounds sarcastic, but I am not sure. If so, in what way do you disagree?

The assumption that there is a political fixed point, i.e. a victory that cannot be reversed, that's where I mightily disagree. While it is hard to think that the banning of slavery, or the women's right to vote is endangered....we've seen supposed "final victories" of the left be eroded by the right, seriously scopes monkey trial anyone? To say that the opposite political side of the fence has won some sort of irreversible victory and for them to worry about it is insane, when we've seen see-sawing happen regularly in our lifetime on that issue, is more than a little dishonest and belittling....it is a bald face lie and attempt to shame one's opponent into shutting up.





An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #141 on: July 27, 2012, 10:06:16 PM »
I also said that about the muskets, being snarky-- and I think you are missing the point. Society has changed and we have altered and amended the constitution to reflect those changes. We no longer have slavery. Women can vote. And hardly anyone has to hunt their food or defend their little home on the prairie against the "savages". We have a police force, telephones, and machine guns instead of single shot muskets.

I know, I have said as much in different words. I was specifically arguing that we have the ability to use current views to extrapolate rights which were not explicitly provided for. That is fine, the ability to do that was built into the constitution. As to the sentence that I highlighted...It doesn't matter that we no longer need to hunt for our food, some people still like to do so. As for the "savages" do we not still have the right to defend our home and family from criminals who may intend to rape or murder us?  I know...we are supposed to call 911 because when seconds count, a cop is mere minutes away.

Should we just run and let them victimize us? I'm not saying that I would just blow away the first person who breaks into my house, no, but I WILL have a loaded gun in my hand just in case he/she can't be reasoned with.

Quote
So, why the resistance to altering the constitution to say that private citizens can't have certain weapons, and can't have more than a certain amount of ammo? And that you can't keep a bunch of loaded guns in your house? And that you should be properly trained and licensed to legally own one at all? What could possibly be wrong with that in a sane world?

I specifically outlined where I would personally draw the line. I have no problem with limiting the average person's access to certain types weapons. But I don't see a problem if someone wants to keep loaded guns in their house. I mean, how you going to enforce that law anyway?

What real difference does it make if they have 100 rounds of ammo or 100,000?

As far as being properly trained and licensed, 100% agree.

Quote
You don't need high powered weaponry to hunt, because the deer don't shoot back.


I don't hunt but if I did, I would be a bow hunter. But it's irrelevant because no one "needs" to hunt, period. However, you don't want religious nut jobs telling you what you can and can't do with your own vagina...why would expect hunters to accept liberal tree hugging environmentalists telling them what they can or cannot eat or where they shall obtain their food of choice?

Quote
If you want to shoot at targets, go to a range, get the gun there, shoot at the target and go home.  That's what they do in Canada and Japan. And they aren't burying children every few weeks from gun violence.

Why do you want to take away my constitutional rights? I don't give a fuck how they do it in Canada or Japan.

I saw a video of a two year old, in China, that wandered out into the road and got hit by a truck. It was a busy alley way lined with little shops on either side. The truck kept driving and the busy people living their busy lives kept walking. You could still see the little child squirming and trying to move but nobody stopped to help. A little while later another truck slowly ran over the child, stopped with a tire on top of the child's body then slowly rolled on down the road. The child was still alive after this. I think it was almost an hour before the mother finally came onto the scene and frantically scooped her child up. Still alive after being hit by one truck and ran over by another the child suffered alone on a busy street for over an hour before she was taken to a hospital where she finally died.

Children and adults alike are buried everyday in China as a result of hit and run. There are too many people who are too busy to be bothered to stop for pedestrians who have been hit by vehicles.

The problem is not congestion or cars, the problem is the attitude. The lack of compassion for their fellow man. In America, the problem is not the guns...it is the attitude, the lack of compassion for our fellow man. Banning guns in America wont change our attitude. 

Quote
If you think that X amount of handguns and XXX amount of ammo will defend you against the US government, you are wrong. You also need a few nuclear warheads, some cruise missiles, some attack helicopters, some nuclear subs, some fighter planes, some drones, some aircraft carriers and the trained people to operate all of that. Basically, you'd have to be Israel. Or China.

This line of argument is way too complex and nuanced for me to delve into at this time. Let's just say that I agree that protection from a tyrannical government is not as simple as everyone owning a gun.

Quote
So, people who want hundreds of guns are just paranoid freaks, because there is no way that they can fight the US government militarily. Or they are dangerous terrorists who should be under constant surveillance. And people will keep getting shot until we come to our senses and wake up to the fact that it ain't 1773. Tell that to the gun lobby.

Nice sound bite. But it's a false dilemma.

Quote
BTW on the abortion topic: the founders were well aware of abortion and decided, wisely, to leave such issues up to the women themselves....

How do you know for a fact that was their reasoning for not mentioning abortion? I wanna see your tea leaves. I mean, they didn't think women were wise enough to cast a vote. What makes you think they thought women were wise enough to choose between life and death?

Don't get me wrong...I'm all for adding personal liberty and amending the constitution to INCREASE our rights. I just don't think it's a good idea to start amending the constitution to REMOVE our rights.

I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12521
  • Darwins +300/-32
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #142 on: July 27, 2012, 10:44:57 PM »
Giving people the right to more easily kill one another harms another right - the right to life.  It's one of those lesser-important rights.
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #143 on: July 27, 2012, 10:52:29 PM »
From where do they derive their power?

money

Blackwell -

They have money which will be donated to the re-election campaign of the politician they are lobbying. That's why a "regular" citizen can't lobby their representative to any effect. They could try, but without a backing of money that could be used for or against the politician, your say doesn't mean diddly squat. You are nobody - nothing to them. I've written my representative and after a week I got back a form letter which was basically trash. The whole system is rigged. We need representatives who are elected for one term to go do a job and then go home.

Where do they get their money? How is it different from where employee unions get their money?
How is it different from how they choose to use their money?

The way I see it you have the NRA defending the 2nd amendment. The ACLU defending the first. NAACP defending equal rights for all...apparently for everything, League of women voters[1] defending the 19th and much more as well.

You are right, as lone individuals we are powerless. But, through our membership with these organizations we have a powerful collective voice.

It's easier for the legislators to listen to the lobbyist who represents thousands or millions than it is to listen to thousands or millions of individual people.

So the NRA does nothing wrong in their defense of it's members[2] constitutional rights. 
 1. Wish they still conducted presidential debates.
 2. and by extension, every citizen
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Colorado Movie Shooting
« Reply #144 on: July 27, 2012, 10:53:56 PM »
Giving people the right to more easily kill one another harms another right - the right to life.  It's one of those lesser-important rights.

No one has the right to kill anyone. Except the government of coarse.

Edit
If we had the right to kill then James Holmes would not be standing trial.
« Last Edit: July 27, 2012, 10:56:55 PM by Mr. Blackwell »
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.